Home

April 20, 2018

The proposal for India and Russia to jointly develop an advanced fighter
— the eponymous Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) — has been
formally buried. Business Standard has learnt that National Security
Advisor Ajit Doval conveyed the decision to a Russian ministerial
delegation at a “Defence Acquisition Meeting” in end-February.

Doval
and Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra, who attended the meeting, asked the
Russians to proceed alone with developing their fifth-generation
fighter. They said India might possibly join the project later, or buy
the fully developed fighter outright, after it entered service with the
Russian Air Force.

New Delhi and Moscow have discussed the
FGFA since 2007, when they agreed that Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) would
partner Russia’s Sukhoi Design Bureau (Sukhoi) in developing and
manufacturing the fighter. In 2010, Sukhoi flew the fighter, called
Perspektivny Aviatsionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatsii, or “Prospective
Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation” (PAK-FA). Seven prototypes are
currently in flight-testing.

Russia said the PAK-FA met its
needs, but the India Air Force (IAF) wanted a better fighter. So HAL and
Sukhoi negotiated an $8.63-billion deal to improve the PAK-FA with the
IAF’s requirements of stealth (near-invisibility to radar), super-cruise
(supersonic cruising speed), networking (real-time digital links with
other battlefield systems) and airborne radar with world-beating range.
In all, the IAF demanded some 50 improvements to the PAK-FA, including
360-degree radar and more powerful engines.

Defence ministry
sources who played a direct role in negotiations with Russia say much of
this money was earmarked for Indian production facilities for
manufacturing 127 FGFAs, and for India’s work share in developing
advanced avionics for the fighter. It also included the cost of four
PAK-FA prototypes for IAF test pilots to fly.

Now, the IAF has
backed away from the FGFA because it argues the PAK-FA — which Sukhoi
has been test-flying since January 2010 — is not stealthy enough for a
fifth-generation combat aircraft.

Aerospace analysts who support
the PAK-FA reject this argument. They point out that the US Air Force
F-22 Raptor, was built with an extraordinary degree of stealth, but that
proved to be counterproductive, since it resulted in high maintenance
and life-cycle costs. Burned by that emphasis on stealth alone, US
designers de-emphasised stealth while building their latest
fifth-generation fighter, the F-35 Lightning II. Instead, they focused
on building its combat edge through better sensors, highly networked
avionics and superior long-range weapons.
The cancellation of the FGFA project has far-reaching implications for
the IAF, for which this was once its high-tech future fighter. United
Progressive Alliance (UPA) defence minister AK Antony had ruled out
buying the F-35 Lightning II, arguing that India would have the FGFA to
meet its fifth-generation fighter needs.

Indian aerospace
designers also cited the FGFA experience as essential learning for
developing the indigenous fifth generation Advanced Medium Combat
Aircraft (AMCA), which the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) is
pursuing.

Now, the FGFA’s burial sets the stage for the IAF to
eventually acquire the F-35 Lightning II, which comes in air force as
well as naval variants. Indian military aviation, once overwhelmingly
dependent upon Russian fighters, helicopters and transport aircraft, has
steadily increased its purchases from America. On Tuesday, appearing
before a US Senate panel for his confirmation hearings, Admiral Philip
Davidson — nominated as the top US military commander in the
Indo-Pacific, said the US should aspire to “break down” India’s
historical dependence upon Russia.

The IAF has been split down
the middle on the FGFA. Broadly, flying branch officers of the “French
school”– whose careers have centred on the Mirage and Jaguar fighters —
have tended to oppose the FGFA. Meanwhile, officers from the “Russian
school”, their careers grounded in the MiG and Sukhoi fleet, have
supported the FGFA.

Opponents of the FGFA have even argued that
the project would duplicate and hinder the indigenous AMCA project.
However, last July, an experts group headed by Air Marshal (Retired) S
Varthaman, set up to consider this question, ruled that there were no
conflict lines between the FGFA and AMCA. It stated that the
technological expertise that would be gained from working with Russian
experts would benefit the AMCA project.

In co-developing the
FGFA, HAL was expected to deploy its experience in working with
composite materials, which were to replace many of the metal fabricated
panels on the PAK-FA. India was also expected to participate in
designing the 360-degree active electronically scanned array (AESA)
radar. In addition, the experience of flight-testing the Tejas Light
Combat Aircraft would be refined by flight-testing a heavier, more
complex fighter.These challenges were expected to imbue Indian engineers with genuine
design skills, of a far higher magnitude than the lessons learnt from
licensed manufacture.

In addition, the FGFA’s foreclosure means
the loss of $295 million that India sunk into its “preliminary design
phase” between 2010 and 2013